If I were to stack a 1.4x and 2x tele, which one should be attached to the camera body to minmise degradation in image quality?
Stacking teles... which one first?
- Thread starter mpenza
- Start date
- Status
Not sure, but I would say it depends on which TC is in better condition (or cleaner). Put the cleaner TC further from the body so that the dirt is not magnified. 
i believe the 1.4x should be closer to the lens. You will be magnifying a lens+1.4x with a 2x, which seems better than magnifying a lens+2x image with a 1.4x. But i'm just guessing here. In fact, my guess is that your tripod won't be steady enough.
thanks guys for your suggestions. will try out some day. I did test the "stack" previously with a 1.4x closer to the body (EF 100 macro usm used)... but I tried too many combinations (1.4x, 2x, 1.4x with B300, 2x with B300, stacked, stacked with B300) that I lost track which is which ;p AF was ok with 1.4x + B300 and 2x + B300 but was significantly slower with stacked and stacked + B300.
if I use a nonextending lens (e.g. 100mm macro usm), my 1.2kg "digital" tripod (slik sprint pro gm + manfrotto magnesium panhead) still can tahan ;p
if I use a nonextending lens (e.g. 100mm macro usm), my 1.2kg "digital" tripod (slik sprint pro gm + manfrotto magnesium panhead) still can tahan ;p
Macro lens say 10 elements
1.4x with 5 elements
2.0x with 7 elements
Total is a whopping 22 elements, 44 air/glass surface to reflect light. Light lost due to reflection is already 30 to 40%. Add all sorts of aberrations and the reduction in 3 stops, the poor light ray is not longer razor sharp, but look more like sotong. :nono:
Good luck to you and the poor light ray that needs to meander thru' so many elements. Add that cropping factor of 1.5 if you're using dSLR.
I thought the rule of the thumb is to add ONE teleconverter to a PRIME lens or else it's an utter waste of time and effort. :blah: :blah:
1.4x with 5 elements
2.0x with 7 elements
Total is a whopping 22 elements, 44 air/glass surface to reflect light. Light lost due to reflection is already 30 to 40%. Add all sorts of aberrations and the reduction in 3 stops, the poor light ray is not longer razor sharp, but look more like sotong. :nono:
Good luck to you and the poor light ray that needs to meander thru' so many elements. Add that cropping factor of 1.5 if you're using dSLR.
I thought the rule of the thumb is to add ONE teleconverter to a PRIME lens or else it's an utter waste of time and effort. :blah: :blah:
smallaperture said:
hehe, rules are meant to be broken
By the way mpenza, what sort of magification did you end up getting? I'm also thinking of experimenting with extension tubes and telecovertors to get greater than lifesize using Nikon equipment...
In photo, break rules = penalty of lower resolution, darker image in the viewfinder, AF hunting.... and unsatisfactory results and frustration. Maybe, a simple cropping might be better. Maybe, try it out and let us all know the results for everybody to learn from the experience and maybe, establish some new rule, new advice to some newbies.
For me, I will stick to the few rules of the thumb. I apply some creativity to composition, lighting, angles etc. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
For me, I will stick to the few rules of the thumb. I apply some creativity to composition, lighting, angles etc. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
it depends which brand of TCs are you using. Sigma only allow the 2X to be stacked to the lens first and the followed by the 1.4X to the body. Not the other way round
smallaperture said:In photo, break rules = penalty of lower resolution, darker image in the viewfinder, AF hunting.... and unsatisfactory results and frustration. Maybe, a simple cropping might be better. Maybe, try it out and let us all know the results for everybody to learn from the experience and maybe, establish some new rule, new advice to some newbies.
For me, I will stick to the few rules of the thumb. I apply some creativity to composition, lighting, angles etc. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
In macrophotography, you wouldn't be using AF anyway and would be stopping down alot to gain DOF, so AF and small apertures aren't really a problem. John Shaw uses quite abit of creative usage of teleconvertors, extension tube and diopter lenses (sometimes all at once!), and has gotten good publishable images, so I believe it can be done, though I agree sometimes that cropping can be better.
TME said:
You can try, but there's no guarantee of it working and that you are able to get acceptable images. I believe that for zooms, one should only try teleconvertors on the pro constant f2.8 zooms. A 1.4X results in f4, a 2X gives f5.6. A teleconvertor magnifies the image, as well as any flaws, chromatic aberrations etc, so one should only start with the best possible lens (usually a prime), to cut down on the flaws which will appear later.
If you're stacking on a zoom, watch out for moving rear element in the lens. They may fit when zoomed out, but hit the convertor zoomed back in.
- Status
Similar threads
